CVE-2023-4518
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA vulnerability exists in the input validation of the GOOSE messages where out of range values received and processed by the IED caused a reboot of the device. In order for an attacker to exploit the vulnerability, goose receiving blocks need to be configured.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceA denial-of-service vulnerability exists in the input validation of IEC 61850 GOOSE messages within Intelligent Electronic Devices (IEDs). When out-of-range values are received and processed by GOOSE receiving blocks, the device reboots. This is a classic input validation failure where the IED does not properly validate field ranges before processing, leading to a condition that causes a system crash.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 2.2.0, < 2.2.2.6>= 2.2.3, < 2.2.3.7>= 2.2.4, < 2.2.4.4>= 2.2.5, < 2.2.5.6>= 2.2.4, < 2.2.4.4>= 2.2.5, < 2.2.5.6= 2.2.1= 2.2.1.6>= 2.2.5, < 2.2.5.6= 2.2.1= 2.2.1.6CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the device modelLocate the device nameplate, management interface, or system documentation to confirm the model is one of: Relion 670, Relion 650, or Relion Sam600 IoAffected if The device is not one of these three models - the vulnerability does not apply
-
Check the installed firmware versionAccess the device management interface, web UI, or use the appropriate command to query the firmware version. Compare the version number against the affected ranges: Relion 670: >= 2.2.0 to < 2.2.2.6, >= 2.2.3 to < 2.2.3.7, >= 2.2.4 to < 2.2.4.4, >= 2.2.5 to < 2.2.5.6; Relion 650: >= 2.2.4 to < 2.2.4.4, >= 2.2.5 to < 2.2.5.6, = 2.2.1, = 2.2.1.6; Relion Sam600 Io: >= 2.2.5 to < 2.2.5.6, = 2.2.1, = 2.2.1.6Affected if The firmware version falls within any of the listed affected ranges
-
Confirm GOOSE receiving functionality is configuredReview the IEC 61850 configuration on the IED to determine if any GOOSE receiving blocks are enabled. This is typically found in the device configuration software, ICD/SCD files, or the device web interface under IEC 61850 settingsAffected if GOOSE receiving blocks are enabled and actively processing incoming GOOSE messages - the vulnerability requires this to be exploitable
-
Verify network exposure to GOOSE messagesExamine network segmentation and access controls to determine if the IED can receive GOOSE messages from untrusted sources on the networkAffected if The IED can receive GOOSE messages from network sources that are not explicitly trusted - combined with the above conditions, this increases likelihood of exploitation
The device is affected if it is a Relion 670, 650, or Sam600 Io with firmware version matching the affected ranges AND has GOOSE receiving blocks enabled, as the vulnerability is triggered when out-of-range values in received GOOSE messages are processed.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped2.2.2.62.2.3.72.2.4.4
Implement proper input validation and bounds checking on all GOOSE message fields within the IED firmware. Consider network segmentation to limit GOOSE message exposure to trusted sources only, and ensure GOOSE receiving blocks are only configured when explicitly required for operational needs.
Firmware version 2.2.5.6 or later for Relion 670/650/Sam600 Io
- 1. Identify the exact Relion device model (670, 650, or Sam600 Io) and current firmware version from the device management interface
- 2. Download the firmware update from Hitachi Energy's official support portal (publisher.hitachienergy.com)
- 3. Review device backup procedures in the product manual before initiating the update
- 4. Apply firmware version 2.2.5.6 or later using the standard firmware upgrade procedure for the specific device
- 5. After upgrade, verify the device is operational and GOOSE receiving blocks are functioning correctly
- 6. Confirm the device no longer reboots when receiving out-of-range GOOSE message values
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-4518 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-4518 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data